Raptor Lake Leaks + Intel 4 developments

[uscool]

Watched a few reviews and performance numbers look pretty good. Power consumption / efficiency are laughable but it's not a bad product as a balls to the wall must be fastest product. The big question is where the hell do they go from here? They don't have a more advanced node unless they push production to TSMC so they will be relying on small incremental improvements on the Intel 7 node or they will need to throw more power at it. I'm much more interested in what happens next gen now to see what they do as more power at this level doesn't seem to be the right approach so performance needs to come from somewhere else.

Overall though it doesn't seem a bad product. Competitive but missing some stuff like AVX512 etc which for most isn't a show stopper anyway but certainly helps intel to keep that power down. Not seeing these 40% gains at the same power but then I don't think anybody really expected that anyway. Not bad overall, not ground breaking or magic in anyway and honestly it is almost exactly what I expected it to be, decent showing tbh but honestly where do they go from here?

Regarding avx512 can't be that important the way Dave carried on about with rocket lake and avx512 being the next best thing and now seems happy not to have it at all

 

[Bencher]

So after watching a few different reviews the take away seems to be that the 13900k beats the 7950X in most workloads even when set to the Intel limits which is 250w vs around 220w for the 7950X.

The 13900k is cheaper than the 7950X, motherboards are also cheaper and you can reuse your old DDR4 for even more savings if you wish. The board and CPU saving alone negates the advantage of AM5s upgradablity and it would likely cost no more buying a 13900k + Z690 then buying a 14900k + Z890 than it would buying an X670 + 7950X then buying a 8950X.

The 13600k looks a real winner against the 7600X and 7700X.

Nah, the 7950x is still better if you are primarily interested in MT performance. They are both plenty fast, but the 7950x is faster at a sane 150w power limit

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The 13600k looks a real winner against the 7600X and 7700X.

Because again AMD(like with the Zen3 launch),made the Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7 CPUs cost more per core than the Ryzen 9 models. If the Ryzen 5 7600X and Ryzen 7 7700X had the same per core price,the Ryzen 5 7600X would be around £290 and the Ryzen 7 7700X would be around £385. The Ryzen 5 7600X looks utterly underwhelming compared to the Core i5 13600KF IMHO,especially if you look outside gaming benchmarks.

 

[uscool]

So after watching a few different reviews the take away seems to be that the 13900k beats the 7950X in most workloads even when set to the Intel limits which is 250w vs around 220w for the 7950X.

The 13900k is cheaper than the 7950X, motherboards are also cheaper and you can reuse your old DDR4 for even more savings if you wish. The board and CPU saving alone negates the advantage of AM5s upgradablity and it would likely cost no more buying a 13900k + Z690 then buying a 14900k + Z890 than it would buying an X670 + 7950X then buying a 8950X.

The 13600k looks a real winner against the 7600X and 7700X.

Games are already showing difference with ddr5 over ddr4 you really fine building pc and having it for next 2-3 years on ddr4 ??

 

[Vince]

Really? Everyone (besides techpowerup and techcspot I guess) have the gains at over 40% at 253w stock. CBR23 is spot on at 43%, but 7zip for example shows bigger gains.

Im seeing what up to around 16% ish single threaded and averages bar some outliers of up to around high 20's to early 30%'s over a lot of workloads. I dont think its right to pick a single workload and say "look its 40% faster" when across a lot of workloads its more like 25/30% faster MT and sort of somewhere between sort or 10 to 20% on those single thread numbers. These are great results tbh but it's not really representative to call it 40% faster at the same power draw.

 

[Noxia]

I thought it was a joke at first, the bickering about what CPU is the best etc, but I’ve realised it’s actually affecting people what others buy.

Why can’t we all just agree that any of the last year or two’s CPU’s are within a small percentage of each other for gaming especially @4K.











But Intel is the best

Legit reminds me of when I was 13 and used to argue about PSX v N64. It was however acceptable at that age.

 

[timorous]

Really? Everyone (besides techpowerup and techcspot I guess) have the gains at over 40% at 253w stock. CBR23 is spot on at 43%, but 7zip for example shows bigger gains.

Wizzard at TPU gets 40k if he turns MCE on but with it off and respecting power limits he gets similar to Puget.

 

[Joxeon]

Games are already showing difference with ddr5 over ddr4 you really fine building pc and having it for next 2-3 years on ddr4 ??

I would be since I already have some nice B-die which will overclock far more than what the reviewers do and in 2-3 years time I could swap out to a set of DDR5 10000mhz for less than what 6000mhz costs now.

 

[Bencher]

Wizzard at TPU gets 40k if he turns MCE on but with it off and respecting power limits he gets similar to Puget.

Which doesn't make sense - cause if he was thermal throttling as you mentioned, turning MCE on wouldn't change anything. He would still be getting the same score. TPus numbers are just off man

 

[Wintermute2]

Raptor Lake looks pretty fast. And hot! Congrats to Gelsinger & Co for taking back tech leadership. Can't wait for Meteor Lake!

 

[Bencher]

Im seeing what up to around 16% ish single threaded and averages bar some outliers of up to around high 20's to early 30%'s over a lot of workloads. I dont think its right to pick a single workload and say "look its 40% faster" when across a lot of workloads its more like 25/30% faster MT and sort of somewhere between sort or 10 to 20% on those single thread numbers. These are great results tbh but it's not really representative to call it 40% faster at the same power draw.

Im sorry, maybe I didn't make it clear. Im talking about heavy MT workloads, not ST or mixed workloads, of course in those I wasn't expecting a 40% increase, that would be absurd. But anything that stresses the CPU , it's 40% at minimum faster than the 12900k. Which is very impressive - at least to me. With that said, id still go for a 7950x if I only cared about MT

 

[Dave2150]

Watched a few reviews and performance numbers look pretty good. Power consumption / efficiency are laughable but it's not a bad product as a balls to the wall must be fastest product. The big question is where the hell do they go from here? They don't have a more advanced node unless they push production to TSMC so they will be relying on small incremental improvements on the Intel 7 node or they will need to throw more power at it. I'm much more interested in what happens next gen now to see what they do as more power at this level doesn't seem to be the right approach so performance needs to come from somewhere else.

Overall though it doesn't seem a bad product. Competitive but missing some stuff like AVX512 etc which for most isn't a show stopper anyway but certainly helps intel to keep that power down. Not seeing these 40% gains at the same power but then I don't think anybody really expected that anyway. Not bad overall, not ground breaking or magic in anyway and honestly it is almost exactly what I expected it to be, decent showing tbh but honestly where do they go from here?

14th gen (Meteor Lake) taped out on Intel's new process "Intel 4". Should be seeing that next year - though subject to additional delays as it looks a complex chip (Intel's first chipset design for desktop)

 

[timorous]

Which doesn't make sense - cause if he was thermal throttling as you mentioned, turning MCE on wouldn't change anything. He would still be getting the same score. TPus numbers are just off man

I didn't say he was, I said he could be because he was using a very different cooler to others.

Looking at it with more data now it seems that those reviews with "253w" limits scoring over 38k may (i repeat may) have MCE turned on and the motherboard is not respecting limits.

TPU, Hub and pugett are all getting about the same score for 250ish w. Pugett also show the difference between a 1 minute run and a 10 minute run.

 

[Vince]

14th gen (Meteor Lake) taped out on Intel's new process "Intel 4". Should be seeing that next year - though subject to additional delays as it looks a complex chip (Intel's first chipset design for desktop)

Nice look forward to that!!! That's where the real competition begins.

 

[humbug]

Raptor Lake looks pretty fast. And hot! Congrats to Gelsinger & Co for taking back tech leadership. Can't wait for Meteor Lake!

You call this tech leadership?

Its a good chip but seriously?

 

[Bencher]

You call this tech leadership?

Its a good chip but seriously?

Ιm sure the graph with the 13900k pulling 400w from the socket is legit. Im sure the chip won't self destruct trying to do that. I mean come on...there is no freaking way you believe that, you are just fanboying. Four hundred watts? LOL

 

[Joxeon]

I didn't say he was, I said he could be because he was using a very different cooler to others.

Looking at it with more data now it seems that those reviews with "253w" limits scoring over 38k may (i repeat may) have MCE turned on and the motherboard is not respecting limits.

TPU, Hub and pugett are all getting about the same score for 250ish w. Pugett also show the difference between a 1 minute run and a 10 minute run.

Jay says that all MB boosting stuff is turned off for his testing and the cpu consumes 253w and runs 82c, he says with it turned on it hits 95c and 350w.

Intel's 13900k Faster AND cheaper?? Oh my...

Check out Crucials DDR5 here! - https://crucial.gg/JayzTwoCents_DDR5Get your JayzTwoCents Merch Here! - https://www.jayztwocents.com○○○○○○ Items featured in ...

www.youtube.com

 

[uscool]

Raptor Lake looks pretty fast. And hot! Congrats to Gelsinger & Co for taking back tech leadership. Can't wait for Meteor Lake!

Leadership in pushing as much power through a chip as possible without melting it

Sorry couldn't help it

 

[Deleted member 258511]

Legit reminds me of when I was 13 and used to argue about PSX v N64. It was however acceptable at that age.

There are two gangs on here that’s very apparent. I’m hoping most of them are 13 or it’s a little creepy if not. One person I’ve noticed is very good at getting a bite, all he has to do is post something and the red corner goes nuts.

 

[uscool]

Jay says that all MB boosting stuff if turned off for his testing and the cpu consumes 253w and runs 82c, he says with it turned on it hits 95c and 350w.

Intel's 13900k Faster AND cheaper?? Oh my...

Check out Crucials DDR5 here! - https://crucial.gg/JayzTwoCents_DDR5Get your JayzTwoCents Merch Here! - https://www.jayztwocents.com○○○○○○ Items featured in ...

www.youtube.com

Lol that's impressive only 95c at 350w was that 350 w for 5 seconds lmao